NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/nation/20041217-1529-pregnantwomanslain.html

Yesterday a woman, 8 months pregnant with her and her husband's first child, was murdered and her baby was removed from her womb. Minutes ago they had an interview with the law enforcement involved in the search and announced that the baby has been found alive and well in a neighboring state. The lead to find the baby was received from another state where the person had seen the Amber Alert.

For those who do not live in the US, we have a system called Amber Alert. When a child is abducted, a nationwide alert with all the information available is spread throughout the country. A number of states have installed electronic signs along highways to flash the information so everyone can be on the lookout.

The officers in the interview made a point of letting people know that there was a nine hour delay in getting out an Amber Alert. Why? Because the baby was not full term. It was considered a "fetus". Some strings had to be pulled to finally get the alert out and the BABY found.

Please put abortion arguments aside (if you can), and tell us what you think.

Because it was removed from the womb prematurely in an environment that was nowhere near sterile, it may have been assumed that the life-form was not able to survive outside of the womb.

8 months is generally considered viable, so the big dispute was pretty silly.

Either way, I'm glad they found the child. At least that's one comfort for the family.

It's good that they found it alive and well, though I'm sorry for the mother. In any case, I find the man that did this to be one sick fellow that needs to spend his life in a mental hospital!

My God. What the hell is wrong with people? good grief.... :mad: :(

Because it was removed from the womb prematurely in an environment that was nowhere near sterile, it may have been assumed that the life-form was not able to survive outside of the womb.

An 8 month fetus is usually viable. Sterile conditions aren't necessary (think of the babies born at home in third world countries). They haven't said if something in particular made them believe the baby was alive, but the first announcements of the crime said they were looking for a living baby. It was good to see that you allowed that a "fetus" is a life-form and not a lump of inanimate flesh.

An 8 month fetus is usually viable. Sterile conditions aren't necessary (think of the babies born at home in third world countries). They haven't said if something in particular made them believe the baby was alive, but the first announcements of the crime said they were looking for a living baby. It was good to see that you allowed that a "fetus" is a life-form and not a lump of inanimate flesh.


to me, a freakin amoeba is a life form....as well as blood-sucking parasites.....so..well..yeah..merp.

In the printed and broadcasted media, there is a double-standard in such cases. Medical terminology is used selectively, and often incorrectly used.

A newly born child in the media is usually referred to as 'baby,' when in fact the medical terminology is 'neonate'. The pregnant mother is really, medically speaking, a 'gravida'. However, the media never calls them these, but calls an unborn child the inanimate-sounding 'fetus' and the ridiculousness of this and its inherent sickness is evident in such a case.

The double-standard is clear, and so is the agenda. By dehumanizing an 8-month old child, the radicalness of Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton which allow that child to be killed in the womb is less apparent.

If one were to proceed impartially, a term such as 'preborn human' would be the best, as it is medically correct, and not dehumanizing.

A newly born child in the media is usually referred to as 'baby,' when in fact the medical terminology is 'neonate'. The pregnant mother is really, medically speaking, a 'gravida'. However, the media never calls them these, but calls an unborn child the inanimate-sounding 'fetus' and the ridiculousness of this and its inherent sickness is evident in such a case.
What else do you propse they call foetus and embryos? They use ocrrect terminology. Neonates and gravidae are not commonly used, and people would not know what they were talking about. You're obviously pro-life, and are giving the excuse that you can't abort a foetus because it's a human or some such nonsense. Sure, it almost always has the requisite 46 chromosomes belonging to the species Homo sapiens, but is it a full human yet?

A newly born child in the media is usually referred to as 'baby,' when in fact the medical terminology is 'neonate'. The pregnant mother is really, medically speaking, a 'gravida'. However, the media never calls them these, but calls an unborn child the inanimate-sounding 'fetus' and the ridiculousness of this and its inherent sickness is evident in such a case.
What else do you propse they call foetus and embryones? They use ocrrect terminology. Neonates and gravidae are not commonly used, and people would not know what they were talking about. You're obviously pro-life, and are giving the excuse that you can't abort a foetus because it's a human or some such nonsense. Sure, it almost always has the requisite 46 chromosomes belonging to the species Homo sapiens, but is it a full human yet?

What else do you propse they call foetus and embryones? They use ocrrect terminology. Neonates and gravidae are not commonly used, and people would not know what they were talking about. You're obviously pro-life, and are giving the excuse that you can't abort a foetus because it's a human or some such nonsense. Sure, it almost always has the requisite 46 chromosomes belonging to the species Homo sapiens, but is it a full human yet?
Well, you could call them 'preborn humans'. And yes, preborn humans are full humans. Consult a medical, biological, or even embryological book. Anyone who says otherwise is either promoting an agenda or doesn't like scientific facts.

And yes, I believe in the 'nonsense' that it's wrong to kill humans.

What else do you propse they call foetus and embryos? They use ocrrect terminology. Neonates and gravidae are not commonly used, and people would not know what they were talking about. You're obviously pro-life, and are giving the excuse that you can't abort a foetus because it's a human or some such nonsense. Sure, it almost always has the requisite 46 chromosomes belonging to the species Homo sapiens, but is it a full human yet?

If not human, what is it, or more correctly, him/her? Guppy, cow, alligator, sparrow, duck billed platipus? From the time an egg is fertilized and the first cell splits, it is a growing human being in one stage of development. After a child is born it still develops and grows until it is recognizable as an upright walking, talking, self-feeding, reasoning human. The child doesn't even finish growing in all of its teeth until 20 years or so after birth.

At about nine months the child leaves the mother's womb, but he/she still needs constant care for all of its needs save breathing. If it is a logical argument that a mother has the right to do what she wishes with her body and is therefore entitled to abort her unborn child rather than nurture it, then the same argument should hold until the child is able to completely care for itself. Why should a mother be forced to utilize her body in the care of a child merely because it is no longer in her womb? What do you figure, legalize abortion up until about 7 or 8 years after birth...longer if the child is a little slow in self-preservation?

A newly born child in the media is usually referred to as 'baby,' when in fact the medical terminology is 'neonate'. The pregnant mother is really, medically speaking, a 'gravida'. However, the media never calls them these, but calls an unborn child the inanimate-sounding 'fetus' and the ridiculousness of this and its inherent sickness is evident in such a case.
The first step in any extermination program is the depersonalization of the group to be exterminated. During Germany's noble period of Nazism, Jews, Slavs, Gypsies and other ethnic groups were referred to as "sub-human." This makes it much easier to live with the fact of their extermination. I strongly suspect this is the same process the mainstream media and others are using in an effort to depersonalize and dehumanize children still en vitro.

The first step in any extermination program is the depersonalization of the group to be exterminated. During Germany's noble period of Nazism, Jews, Slavs, Gypsies and other ethnic groups were referred to as "sub-human." This makes it much easier to live with the fact of their extermination. I strongly suspect this is the same process the mainstream media and others are using in an effort to depersonalize and dehumanize children still en vitro.


It's sad how we refer to it as extermination...it sounds like they were rats or something..

Mass murder would be more appopriate. And I live in Missour, but I hadn't heard of this story until I read it here :|

It's good that they found it alive and well, though I'm sorry for the mother. In any case, I find the man that did this to be one sick fellow that needs to spend his life in a mental hospital!


It wasn't a man, it was a chick.

It wasn't a man, it was a chick.
I don't care if it was an it. Send it to a mental hospital!

It's sad how we refer to it as extermination...it sounds like they were rats or something..

Extermination is the term that Hitler and the Nazi party used when referring to Jews, gays, blacks, and most everyone who didn't have a fair complexion and whose sexual orientation wasn't straight. They definitely spent more time and money on doing away with sub-races than they did rats. A similar argument was made during slavery times in the US. Blacks were viewed as an entirely different species, more like a trainable ape. The thought of enslaving a human was abhorrent to most, but who should be denied the right to own livestock?

It is interesting to note that the issue of making abortion legal came up at the same time that over-population became an issue. After a vigorous campaign, 2.4 children became the proper size family, prices on everything escalated drastically, the housewives and mothers went to work in order to make ends meet, and abortion became legal. Since then Little Johnny and Little Suzie, have not had the benefit of more "quality" time with their parents. Our youth now present a whole new set of problems: incurable STD's, high rate of teenage pregnancy, use of drugs by a majority, gang violence, obesity, lowered educational achievement (being smart isn't cool anymore), and a spreading feeling of lack of responsibility. Compound that with a divorce rate of almost 60%. But, hey, it's worth it, isn't it, as long as we have the right to murder our children up until the cord is cut?

I don't care if it was an it. Send it to a mental hospital!

No, to the death house.

I've gotten off track onto the abortion issue when I specifically asked that we not go down that road again. :rolleyes: Sorry, it just fires me up.

Anyway, aside from the need for harsh measures against the person who did this terrible thing, how do we view and correct if needed, the ideology that at first made this baby a non-person and not worthy of the care and help that a full-term baby would have had?

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=342902

The story on ABC is titled Woman Charged in Grisly Theft of Fetus even though the charge is actually kidnapping resulting in death. Isn't this an example of mainstream media influencing our views on pre-term life?

Please put abortion arguments aside (if you can), and tell us what you think.

Abortion??? Wtf does it have to do with this dramatic story??? I'd be curious to know in which country exactly it is legal to abort a 8 month fetus??? Why mention it then, if it's not to mix things up? ... Whatever...

Abortion??? Wtf does it have to do with this dramatic story??? I'd be curious to know in which country exactly it is legal to abort a 8 month fetus??? Why mention it then, if it's not to mix things up? ... Whatever...

Uh, it's legal to abort a baby at 8 months in this country under certain circumstances. The reason the baby in this story was at first denied the status of a naturally delivered baby and an Amber Alert issued immediately, was because of the laws surrounding abortion that labeled it a "fetus". Some follow-up news stories are still referring to the child as a fetus.

I didn't want this thread to deteriorate into the same old arguments for and against abortion. Rather, I wanted to discuss the impact that abortion laws have made in other aspects of our society.

Extermination is the term that Hitler and the Nazi party used when referring to Jews, gays, blacks, and most everyone who didn't have a fair complexion and whose sexual orientation wasn't straight. They definitely spent more time and money on doing away with sub-races than they did rats. A similar argument was made during slavery times in the US. Blacks were viewed as an entirely different species, more like a trainable ape. The thought of enslaving a human was abhorrent to most, but who should be denied the right to own livestock?

It is interesting to note that the issue of making abortion legal came up at the same time that over-population became an issue. After a vigorous campaign, 2.4 children became the proper size family, prices on everything escalated drastically, the housewives and mothers went to work in order to make ends meet, and abortion became legal. Since then Little Johnny and Little Suzie, have not had the benefit of more "quality" time with their parents. Our youth now present a whole new set of problems: incurable STD's, high rate of teenage pregnancy, use of drugs by a majority, gang violence, obesity, lowered educational achievement (being smart isn't cool anymore), and a spreading feeling of lack of responsibility. Compound that with a divorce rate of almost 60%. But, hey, it's worth it, isn't it, as long as we have the right to murder our children up until the cord is cut?


Needless to say, "extermination" is still something you do to rats, not people.

It is not uncommon for mentaly unablanced women to kidnap babies after a late-term miscarriage or years of infertility. This is a more extreme version of the phenomonon, but it happens suprisingly often.

As for the fetus/ baby debate, its jsut stupid. A fetus is as much a living human as anyone else. The problem is that people don't want to admit the truth of the problem, that sometimes it is okay to kill people. It sometimes is okay to kill innocent people. Rarely, but sometimes. If a woman's health is threatened by pregnancy, she should be able to have an abortion. Almost everyone agrees to this. However, we can't spends months waiting for a judge to determine if a woman's health is sufficiently threatened to permit an abortion, we can't have doctors risking jail time to save a pregnant woman's life and we force women to choose between a possible prision sentence and possible death, so we give the mother absolute authority in the matter.
It is their bodies and, like ships' captains, they have the final say about how stays in their bodies.
If a person is a danger to the well being of a ship the captain can make that person walk the plank, if a baby endangers a mother's well being she can have an abortion. Its simple really. If more people accepted that then there wouldn't be any of this silly, "killing a fetus isn't homocide" talk.

It's sad how we refer to it as extermination...it sounds like they were rats or something..
My point exactly. Language has power to alter our perceptions of reality, and referring to a pogram as "a sub-human extermination program" makes it more palatable.

Abortion??? Wtf does it have to do with this dramatic story??? I'd be curious to know in which country exactly it is legal to abort a 8 month fetus??? Why mention it then, if it's not to mix things up? ... Whatever...
It is legal to abort a preborn human in the United States in every single state up until the moment before birth (indeed, even if only a small percentage of the body is still inside the mother) for any reason whatsoever. Don't believe me? Read Roe v. Wade, and then Doe v. Bolton. Those two cases, released on the same day, guarantee that.

If a woman's health is threatened by pregnancy, she should be able to have an abortion.
A woman never under any circumstance has to get an abortion to save her life. The preborn human can always be removed and kept in an ICU until it is able to survive without a safe environment.

My point exactly. Language has power to alter our perceptions of reality, and referring to a pogram as "a sub-human extermination program" makes it more palatable.

Yes, and calling an as yet unborn baby a fetus makes infanticide more palatable...to some.

Yes, and calling an as yet unborn baby a fetus makes infanticide more palatable...to some.
Certainly worth thinking about, isn't it.

Certainly worth thinking about, isn't it.

If you can get folks to actually THINK. The 3 most used words are "me", "myself" and "I". I know of one couple who had their child aborted as the sonogram showed that it was a girl and they wanted a boy. I have a grandchild that the doctor recommended being aborted as amniocentesis indicated she had severe spinal bifida. Turned out the doc was off 4 weeks on the due date and she was fine. She got her drivers license in November so I guess she's going to make it.